Eagle1993

In the CFL sale, my understanding is that they will list it at FMV. If it doesn't sell, they will transfer ownership to the trust at FMV. The trust can then sell the property at FMV in the future.

Its great to hear ... but at $10M/month, it feels like we will lose 3-5 local camps each month this trial goes on. Hopefully the BSA & TCC lawyers finally sit in a room and don't leave until there is a settlement. No food, no water, just sit. Heck .. perhaps we can put them up at a camp site in one of our camps. They have to make their own fires, cook for themselves and not leave the area until there is a deal.

This will be interesting if it moves forward. Has she discussed restricted assets (JP Morgan/Summit)?

The law firm needs cash flow as well., I don't see them working for credit. So ... perhaps JP Morgan can loan the BSA MORE money that will then be spent on lawyers. Or National can special assess councils (each council needs to provide $1M or they lose their charter). Or they sell properties to fund legal expenses. Even at $10M per month, I think the BSA can find cash to support this for a long time (unless they decide a better strategy is to liquidate National).

Anybody watching the zoom of the Chapter 11 hearing today? Any punches thrown? Just heard that there was an exchange that $100M has been spent on lawyers to date and $150M will be spent by August. Judge called it "staggering".

To give you an idea what we are talking about ....

If you look at the BSA disclosure update you get an idea of how complex this is. There are insurance policies for every council listed by date over decades. Take council xyz, they list the insurance policy year by year (some years they changed mid year). Each of these policies may have caps on total payouts. Combine this with the National insurance policies and I wonder how this will ever be settled.

Camp Freeland Leslie A patrol cooking camp. No pool. No ATVs. Just a private lake in the middle of Wisconsin. Great staff and a fun program. Will be missed.

I figure we can have a separate thread on a list of bankruptcy losses. This is not speculation of what could happen, but did happen/is happening.

CFL is a patrol cooking camp. It turns a profit. Its well run with great volunteers. They ran camp during Covid and did it well. I love that camp and we will be there this summer ... While Three Fires is not my council, they are well run and have positive balance sheets. This is what is happening with a settlement that will be rejected. Our only hope is that some of today's wealthy individuals buys the camps and keeps them as scout camps. I can barely type .... I don't know how I am going to tell our scouts. We already lost our long term in council camp a couple of years ago ... now this.

My local camp! I’m sick

Very interesting document. https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/881153_2391.pdf From what I understand, the claimants are asking the court to estimate their total damages (bottoms up) year by year. So, for example, if an average sex abuse claim should be paid off by $500K and there are 84,000 claims the total amount would be $42B. Then, that would be broken into year by year. Then they can figure out what National, LC, CO and their insurance companies could pay to hit the $42B. (Not necessarily $42B, but you get the idea). Don't forget, the insurance is complex as there are different policies for different years for different groups and each policy has max payouts. Interesting ... I wonder if the court will support this method. It could help set a top down target that the BSA & insurance companies need to meet bottoms up (or at least target).

IMHO, the ONLY way a settlement is reached is if there is trust from the TCC and the claimants that the offer represents a significant portion of local council available assets. The only way the BSA LCs can establish this trust is through transparency. Without transparency, I see no way the TCC recommends approval EVER. Without their approval, there will never be a settlement that includes LCs.

I think it varies by individual. We have a coed girl Troop that works alongside our Boy Troop. 1 - Quiet, very quiet. Parents pushing her to get Eagle quickly. Currently star rank and will likely earn Eagle with no PL, ASPL or SPL experience. 2 - Loud, physical. Plays sports. Been to the BWCA every summer of her life since 3. No desire for leadership roles so far. Going to Philmont. Does have some push for Eagle as her older brother just missed out, but primary focus has not been advancement. 3- Somewhat quiet, balanced between advancement and hiking activities. Covid slowing her down a lot (parent concerned). 4 - New girl, very vocal. Still getting to know her. 5 - Quiet girl, heavily involved in other activities. Will likely not have many leadership roles unless she cuts back other activities. If I had to generalize where I see boys vs girls prioritize. Boys, in general, seem to prioritize outdoor adventure, then leadership, then advancement (MBs). The girls, in general, seem to prioritize advancement, then outdoor adventure, then leadership. So, I do expect girls to have a higher rate of Eagle Scouts, but I don't see them taking over all the leadership positions in a coed Troop. I hate saying this as there are examples of boys and girls that break that generalization. I will say boys get much more advancement focused at age 17.5.

I think this is a better argument for single gender. The strong male leaders will do fine when competing against the girls. The truth ... they want the girl membership fees without losing any boy membership fees. So .... they are attempting to create a solution that simply doesn't work.

BSA needs to separate the bumps, bruises from the serious injuries, death or life long psychological scarring. Laser tag, dodge ball, cordless screw drivers, etc. .... I highly doubt these result in significant injuries. I've seen worse injuries in my Troop from a stick and a pot of boiling water. Equating water guns, paint ball and laser tag to actual guns is weak. I think we can teach gun safety with a .22 riffle while allowing kids to use water guns on a hot day. (Side note ... my mother in law forbid play guns in her house. Her son is now probably the biggest pro NRA guy I know and as kids they made EVERYTHING into a gun.) Put the real high risk items in G2SS and sex abuse/bulling in YP/B2A. The rest ... let the scouts have fun under they eye of trained leaders.

My guess ... deferred. TCC gave the BSA until July? before they push for lawsuits against LCs. In return, councils must provide details on membership roles, summer camps, units, etc. TCC can then use this data (and time) to help clean up the claims list. I wonder if TCC self audits (as they already seemed to have) and identifies possible issues with some claims. I don't see the judge allowing discovery during that process. She may just say, lets see where that list is at in August and see if discovery is warranted. Too many moving parts otherwise. Just a guess....

Hearing scheduled tomorrow. Does anyone know what will be covered? Any "BIG" decisions or are those coming in the April hearing?

I believe the Wall Street Journal & NY TImes have done similar stories. https://www.wsj.com/articles/boy-scouts-bankruptcy-roiled-by-suspicions-about-asset-transfers-11594325864 https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/19/us/boy-scouts-bankruptcy-assets.html

Then it shouldn't be in the Youth Protection FAQ.

It was ... probably 50+ pages back. It really goes to the heart of the issue. Lack of transparency and trust. BSA's #1 goal should be building the trust of the TCC & court through full transparency. Unfortunately, National BSA has issues with transparency & trust so I expect we are headed to a cliff.

I can find a few that would disagree with this statement. I've been in coed activities in high school and college. I was elected president of NHS in High School. I was president of my engineering honor society in college. In my company, I've passed up many of my female colleagues for promotions. There were girls/women in all of these organizations. I have never feared competing with girls/women for leadership roles and have managed and reported to women. I've fired women and hired women. If boys are to compete in the world, they need to learn this. The workplace does not look like it did in the 1960s, 70s, 80s, 90s or even early 2000s. "[coed troops] is not happening." FYI .... coed Troops are happening in the BSA. He has no clue what is going on in the field. Go to any camporee, Klondike, summer camp. Perhaps he needs to be replaced with someone who knows what is actually going on. Also ... “Explaining a joke is like dissecting a frog. You understand it better but the frog dies in the process.”

Currently BSA would say my son having his best friend come over (who is a scout) when two parents are not home is a violation of Youth Protection. I'm sure that has happened (his friend has been over and my wife went out on errands when I was home). So ... I guess I violated YP and should have reported it. The BSA has expanded YP/Barriers to abuse so broadly, most Troops/Packs/Adult Leaders likely run afoul. To me, that waters down the YP/B2A and we run into actual risks. In terms of girls, nearly every girl Troop in my area operates as coed including the one my Troop is associated with. Councils know it, districts know it and they don't care. Over half the girls in the Troop have siblings and parent volunteers who were involved with the Boy Troop. Now ... if BSA really does care, they would crack down, close down those girl and boy Troops who operate that way and be willing to lose volunteers and scouts to other organizations that have implemented fully coed scouting. Is having a girl Troop and boy Troop a youth protection concern, a program or a PR concern? We have a girl from our Girl Troop going with our boys from a Boy Troop crew going to Philmont. So Philmont, councils, districts and units all ignore the separate gender aspect. Either take it out of YP and put this into the program FAQs or enforce it and deal with the membership impacts. YP/B2A must be a non flexible set of rules. If there is any sort of flex, G2SS, guidance documents, program, various other areas are better for communicating. Keep YP/B2A lean and enforced.

The issue is they put this under YPT. A scout BSA youth is at least 10 but likely older. If they said Cub Scout I wouldn’t have an issue or if they out this FAQ under program that would be fine. This is a YPT FAQ.

Who is the COR in this case?